Topics Map > Office of the Secretary of the Faculty > Faculty Senate > University Committee
University Committee Meeting Minutes 2016-01-25
University Committee Meeting Minutes
approved January 29, 2016
UC members present: Broman, Edwards, Litovsky, Meyerand (chair), Wanner, Wendt
Others present: S. Smith, Felber, Laning, Moscicke, Kutz, Browning, Kuba, McFadden, Daniel, Czynszak-Lyne, Droes, Bernard-Donals, Radomski, Richard, Shapiro, Vaughan (and perhaps one or two others)
Chair Meyerand called the meeting to order at 1:03 p.m. and called attention to the release of the Board of Regents draft tenure policies. These will be posted on the SOF website soon and there will be a special UC meeting on Friday to discuss a response. Minutes of the meetings of January 4, 2016, and January 11, 2016, approved.
O’Meara reported that the legislature is moving quickly on a number of bills and public hearings in the next 2 weeks. PROFS is monitoring a several bills closely, including $50K for Alzheimer’s research at Madison, which has good support in the Assembly.
The UC, ASEC, USEC, and ASM representatives discussed the possible creation of a formal, standing shared-governance budget committee. Very strong support for the general idea from all present. Ample discussion coalesced around the following themes. SOF will draft into proposed FPP language for circulation to chairs by end of week.
• Charge: Overarching idea is that committee will focus on strategic, long-range, high-impact budget issues. Committee should be independent and not nested under other body. Administration receptivity will be critical. Committee should be bidirectional: sounding board and advisor for administration and conduit of information and resource for schools, colleges, and divisions, as well as other committees. Major aspect of committee’s charge should be entirety of biennial budget process, from budget building through allocation. Charge would be to advise on all budgets, with emphasis on state budget. Advises and make recommendations to administration. Committee should play major role in broad budget discussions such as activity-based budget implementation, program change, and so on. Relationship to other budget-related committees and issues (living wage, self-insurance, etc.) will depend on issue. Important to maintain flexibility and not overburden with too many specific functions or too much proscription.
• Membership: 3 representatives from each of 4 governance groups. Connection to executive committees, selection of members, and diversity in membership up to each governance group. But no more than one representative per department on committee, no more than one representative per division from each governance group. Ex officio, non-voting members: chancellor, provost, and VCFA or their designees. Committee members should gain detailed knowledge of how overall budget is formulated, strategic choices, resource allocation, and the like. Multiyear commitment for committee members; staggered terms. Initial committee membership should be expedited and then follow each group’s governance process.
• Meetings: Must be frequent enough to be responsive and useful, but recognize time commitment. Monthly meetings with longer “boot camp” at beginning of year.
Chancellor Rebecca Blank provided an update on the System tenure task force process. Legal services will be comparing campus and system documents. Quite a bit of consistency at first read and System draft seems broad enough to allow for leeway in FPP to explicitly detail some aspects. Conversations ongoing. Discussion about campus response to System drafts and timing of submission of campus policies for Board approval. The chancellor also encouraged attendance at upcoming System strategic planning meetings, described the upcoming Madison-hosted Board meeting, and informed those present of her ongoing meetings with schools and big departments, a new upcoming high-level search, and the status of voter ID.
Provost Sarah Mangelsdorf and the UC continued and deepened the discussion about System task force documents and a campus response. Continued agreement that the strongest response would be one document from governance and administration together. Really quite ample discussion.
Athletic Board chair Mark Covaleski brought a macro issue (Big10 meetings) and a micro issue (basketball coach hire) to the UC. The bulk of the discussion was on the latter, which will be the first use of the revised process on searches. (Revised approved policy available on Athletic Board website.) New process involves 5-member committee (co-chair of personnel committee as chair, AB chair, sports liaison, alum, and one other staff or student selected by the AB chair) focusing on academic performance of candidates. This committee conducts interviews and advises full Board. Covaleski also briefed the UC on timing for this specific search, in the context of how the new process works generally. Meyerand asked about the guaranteed alumni seat on what is ostensibly a shared governance committee. Covaleski explained that this was not the original idea but is what the Board approved. Covaleski concluded with a brief synopsis on how travel days are counted. NCAA not changing position, but Big10 and UW considering options not supported by other conferences.
Litovsky moved to convene in closed session pursuant to Wis. Stats. 19.85(1)(c) and (f) to discuss personnel matters. Seconded and passed at 3:31 p.m. The UC considered several faculty members as nominees to the upcoming search committee for a vice chancellor. Three names and four alternates were forwarded to the search coordinator. The UC nominated one faculty member to the search and screen committee for the Director of Risk Management. The UC considered and unanimously approved a dual role waiver request for one year, with additional information required in any future requests. The UC reviewed applications for seats on the Athletic Board and selected five faculty members to interview. The UC took up again a pending grievance. Several aspects of the grievance have been resolved, but there is one pending issue for UC members to read up on before final resolution.
Broman moved to reconvene in open session by closing his computer. Seconded and passed at 4:23 p.m. Meyerand adjourned the meeting at 4:23 pm.
« Previous: University Committee Meeting Minutes 2016-01-11